When our forefathers included the "right to keep and bear
arms" in the United States Constitution, muzzle-loading flintlocks were the state-of-the-art
firearm. In target practice, a skilled
musketeer could get off three shots per minute. Each pull of the trigger required
the shooter to first ram a powder charge and then a ball down the length of the
smooth-bore barrel, then place more gunpowder in the flintlock mechanism.

Commanders found that, under the stress of combat, the rate
of fire was closer to two rounds per minute.

The .223-caliber Bushmaster used by the shooter at Sandy
Hook Elementary School is cheap (starting at about $800) and comes from the factory with a
30-round magazine. After-market magazines carrying 60 rounds or 100 rounds are
readily available by mail-order on the Internet. Each pull of the trigger ends with a new round
of ammunition automatically inserted into the barrel chamber, so you can fire
the semi-automatic weapon just as fast as you can pull the trigger.

Even an unskilled shooter could empty a 100-round magazine
in well under one minute.

Compared to the musket, a Bushmaster assault rifle is a
weapon of mass destruction. Would the framers of the Constitution have included
the right to bear arms had they anticipated such a fearsome weapon?

Maybe. But they would have anticipated that our leadership
would use common sense when determining whether such weapons should be
available to the public.

The federal government has long restricted or banned ownership
of dangerous weapons like cannons and machine guns. (Since the Federal Assault
Weapons Ban elapsed in 2004, fully automatic weapons can be legally owned by
collectors, but they must go through the proper federal licensing process.) American
citizens are not permitted to own a grenade launcher, or a mortar, or a surface-to-air
missile.

We now know that, in the middle of a crowded room, semi-automatic
assault rifles can pack the same lethality.

Since 1918, dove and duck hunters all across our nation have
taken to the field with shotguns that must be plugged -- by federal law -- so
that they can only fire three shots before the hunter must reload. This was done to prevent the wholesale slaughter
of migratory fowl. Do people deserve similar protection?

This image provided by the family shows Grace McDonnell posing for a portrait in this family photo taken Aug. 18, 2012. She was killed last Friday when a gunman opened fire at Sandy Hook school in Newtown, Conn., killing 26 children and adults at the school.

The shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School now tops a litany
of similar carnage this year: A masked
gunman killed two at a mall full of Christmas shoppers in Portland; a white supremacist killed six Sikhs at a temple in Oak Creek, Wis., in
August; a gunman killed 12 and wounded
58 in an Aurora, Colo., movie theater in July; and a former student
fatally shot seven people at a Christian college in Oakland, Calif., in April.

But this time it's different. This time, the victims consist
of small children and the teachers who were trying to protect them. We are so
horrified and heartbroken that we will insist on a reassessment of our nation's
gun laws even as we mourn. This time, we're going to take a long, hard look.

This editorial was written
by Mike Marshall, director of statewide commentary, for the Alabama Media Group
editorial board.

Any discussion on gun control triggers strong responses over a
broad spectrum of opinion. But let's just start with these questions: Should
the capacity of magazines be limited? If so, what should that limit be? We
invite you to discuss this in the comments section below.